Shark finning is the process of cutting off a shark's fins and throwing the rest of the shark back into the ocean. Often, the shark is still alive when it is returned to the water. Without its fins, the shark cannot swim well and may sink to the ocean floor. It may then die from not being able to breathe or be eaten by other animals. Shark finning allows fishing boats to make more money because they only need to carry the fins, which are the most valuable part of the shark. The shark meat is heavy and hard to transport, so it is often left behind. Many countries have banned shark finning or require that the whole shark be brought to a port before its fins are removed.

Since 1997, shark finning has increased because of growing demand for shark fins in dishes like shark fin soup and traditional medicines, especially in China, Taiwan, and Southeast Asia. Recently, some products that look like shark fin soup have been sold, but they do not use real shark fins.

The International Union for Conservation of Nature's Shark Specialist Group states that shark finning is common worldwide. They say the shark fin trade is a major threat to shark populations. In 2007, the global value of the shark fin trade was estimated to be between $540 million and $1.2 billion. Shark fins are among the most expensive seafood items, often selling for $400 per kilogram. In the United States, where shark finning is not allowed, some people pay $10,000 to $20,000 for the fins of whale sharks or basking sharks, treating them as trophies.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the number of sharks caught globally each year has remained about the same, averaging over 500,000 tons annually. However, many sharks are caught in ways that are not reported or regulated.

Shark finning has caused serious harm to ocean ecosystems. It is estimated that 73 to 100 million sharks are killed each year because of finning. Many shark species are in danger, including the critically endangered scalloped hammerhead shark.

Process

Sharks are often harvested for their fins, as shown in the diagram. The main and secondary back fins, along with the pectoral fins, are removed from the top of the shark. In one quick movement, the pelvic fin, anal fin, and the bottom part of the tail fin are also taken.

Since the rest of the shark has little value compared to its fins, sharks are sometimes finned while fishing boats are still at sea. After their fins are removed, the sharks—often still alive—are thrown back into the ocean to make space on the vessel. In legal terms, the phrase "shark finning" specifically refers to removing fins from live sharks at sea and discarding the rest of the body. Removing fins on land during processing is not always considered shark finning for legal purposes.

Shark species that are most commonly targeted for finning include:

• Blacktip (Carcharhinus limbatus)
• Blue (Prionace glauca) (a type of requiem shark)
• Bull (Carcharhinus leucas) (a type of requiem shark)
• Hammerhead (family Sphyrnidae)
• Oceanic whitetip (Carcharhinus longimanus) (a type of requiem shark)
• Porbeagle (Lamna nasus) (a type of mackerel shark)
• Mako (Isurus oxyrinchus) (a type of mackerel shark)
• Sandbar (Carcharhinus plumbeus) (a type of requiem shark)
• Silky (Carcharhinus falciformis) (a type of requiem shark)
• Spinner (Carcharhinus brevipinna) (a type of requiem shark)
• Thresher (family Alopiidae)
• Tiger (Galeocerdo cuvier) (a type of requiem shark)
• Great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias) (a type of mackerel shark)

Impacts

When sharks are finned, they often die because they cannot move to take in oxygen through their gills or are eaten by other fish that find them helpless on the ocean floor. Studies show that about 73 million sharks are finned each year, and scientists believe the number might be closer to 100 million. Most shark species grow slowly and have few offspring, and their reproduction rates cannot match the high number of sharks being killed.

Some studies estimate that 26 to 73 million sharks are caught yearly for their fins. The average number caught between 1996 and 2000 was 38 million, which is much higher than the number reported by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations but lower than estimates from conservation groups. It has been reported that the global shark catch in 2012 was 100 million.

Sharks have a life history that includes slow growth, reaching maturity at a large size and later age, and having low reproductive rates. These traits make them especially vulnerable to overfishing, such as shark finning. Recent studies suggest that changes in the numbers of top predators like sharks can affect many ecological processes.

Some shark populations have declined by as much as 80% over the past 50 years. Some groups say that shark fishing or bycatch (the accidental capture of sharks by other fisheries) is the main cause of population declines, with bycatch accounting for about half of all sharks caught. Others believe the demand for shark fin soup is the primary reason for the decline.

Sharks are top predators and play a major role in marine ecosystems, especially coral reefs. A report by WildAid highlights the importance of sharks to global ocean health.

Fins from sawfish (Pristidae) are highly valued in Asian markets and are among the most expensive shark fins. Sawfish are now protected under the highest level of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), Appendix I.

According to Live Science:

Studies by Creel and Christianson (2008) found that fewer large sharks lead to more marine mammals and reptiles. This can harm the marine ecosystem through both direct and indirect effects. However, scientists are still learning about sharks' roles in ecosystems. Because studying sharks in the wild is difficult, many studies have used models of natural ecosystems (Ferretti et al., 2010).

Vulnerability of sharks

According to the IUCN Red List, 39 species of elasmobranchs (sharks and rays) are listed as threatened species (Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable). Sharks play an important role in ocean ecosystems and are "an indicator for ocean health." Their presence helps maintain a healthy environment because "they often hunt sick, weak, or slower fish populations." However, overfishing in many parts of the world has caused shark populations to decline or become endangered.

In 2013, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) recognized the vulnerability of sharks.

Appendix I, which includes animals that are at risk of extinction, lists the following:
• Requiem sharks (such as Tiger Sharks, Bull Sharks, etc.)
• Hammerhead sharks
• Thresher sharks
• Basking sharks
• Mackerel sharks
• Eagle and mobulid rays
• Freshwater stingrays
• Whale sharks
• Sawfishes

Appendix II, which includes animals that are not currently at risk of extinction but could become so if trade is not carefully managed, lists the following:
• Basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus)
• Great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias)
• Whale shark (Rhincodon typus)

Five additional species were added to the list in 2014:
• Scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini)
• Great hammerhead shark (Sphyrna mokarran)
• Smooth hammerhead (Sphyrna zygaena)
• Porbeagle (Lamna nasus)
• Oceanic whitetip shark (Carcharhinus longimanus)

Opposition

The crew of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society's ship, the RV Ocean Warrior, saw and took pictures of large-scale shark finning in Costa Rica's Cocos Island National Park, a protected marine area. This practice is shown in the documentary Sharks: Stewards of the Reef, which includes footage from Western Australia and Central America. The film also discusses the cultural, financial, and ecological effects of shark finning. Underwater photographer Richard Merritt saw sharks being finned in Indonesia, where he observed sharks without fins lying on the ocean floor, still alive, below fishing boats. Shark finning has also been recorded in the Raja Ampat islands of Indonesia, another protected marine area.

Animal welfare and rights groups strongly oppose shark finning because it causes sharks to suffer. The process leaves sharks with large wounds, and they often die slowly from starvation or drowning. This practice is also a major reason for the fast decline in shark populations worldwide.

According to Canadian journalist Geoffrey York, shark finning is sometimes connected to organized crime groups, including those in China operating in South Africa, Fiji, and Hawaii.

Opponents also question the health risks of eating shark fins, which may contain high levels of toxic mercury. A nonprofit scientific research organization explains that mercury builds up in sharks because they are at the top of the food chain. Sharks eat many animals, and over time, toxins from those animals accumulate in their bodies.

About one-third of shark fins imported to Hong Kong come from Europe. Spain is the largest supplier, sending between 2,000 and 5,000 metric tons of fins each year. Norway sends 39 metric tons, while Britain, France, Portugal, and Italy are also major suppliers. Hong Kong handles at least 50%, and possibly up to 80%, of the world's shark fin trade. Major suppliers include Europe, Taiwan, Indonesia, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates, the United States, Yemen, India, Japan, and Mexico. According to Giam's article, sharks are caught in nearly all parts of the world. Despite promises by the Fisheries Commission in Brussels to protect fish populations, there are few rules against shark fishing in European waters. European consumers highly value the meat of species like dogfish, smoothhounds, cat sharks, skates, and rays. In Canada and the United States, blue sharks are targeted as sport fish, while porbeagles, mako sharks, and spiny dogfish are caught for commercial use. Giam notes that sharks will continue to be caught in large numbers by countries with advanced fishing methods. Even if demand for shark fin soup decreases, the fins from these catches may still be discarded or used for animal feed and fertilizers.

Australian naturalist Steve Irwin refused to eat at Chinese restaurants if shark fin soup was on the menu. American chef Ken Hom points out that Western countries do little to protect fish like cod and sturgeon, even though people criticize shark finning. He also highlights the waste of taking only shark fins.

In 2006, Canadian filmmaker Rob Stewart made a film called Sharkwater, which details the shark fin industry. In March 2011, the Voice of America's Special English service broadcast a 15-minute science program about shark finning.

In 2011, British chef Gordon Ramsay and his team traveled to Costa Rica to investigate illegal shark fin trading. After examining the fins, Ramsay was threatened with a gun and doused in gasoline by criminals for confronting them.

According to WildAid, opposition to shark finning in China has grown due to public campaigns. A 2008 survey in Beijing found that 89% of people supported a ban on shark fin. A 2010 poll on Sina Weibo showed 27,370 people in favor of a ban and only 440 against. A 2013 survey in four Chinese cities found that 91% supported a government ban on the shark fin trade.

WildAid reported in 2019 that shark fin consumption in mainland China had dropped by 80% since 2011, but demand remained high in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. WildAid's CEO, Peter Knights, also noted that demand for shark fins was increasing in Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia.

Reporting

According to Giam Choo Hoo, who has served the longest on The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora Animals Committee and represents the shark fin industry in Singapore, "The idea that people commonly kill sharks only for their fins and remove them while the sharks are still alive is incorrect. Most shark fins sold in the market come from sharks that were already dead."

Researchers challenge this claim by using data from a 2006 study. This study used numbers from the shark fin trade to estimate that between 26 and 73 million sharks are caught each year worldwide. When this number was compared to the total weight of sharks recorded in the Food and Agriculture Organization’s global shark catch database, it was three to four times higher. Researchers suggest this difference may be due to reasons such as sharks being caught and not reported, sharks being grouped into unclear categories, or the frequent practice of cutting off shark fins and throwing the rest of the body back into the ocean. Meliane, a marine conservationist, explains that catching sharks with their fins still attached helps scientists identify species, collect accurate data, and prevent illegal fishing activities. However, because shark remains are not always correctly identified, scientific reports and statistics may not always be reliable. This suggests that the industry may be hiding the true number of sharks caught or regularly cutting off shark fins.

According to Shark Stewards, a nonprofit environmental group, most shark fins are sent to Hong Kong for processing and then sent to countries like China and the United States. Dried shark fins sold in the market often lack information about where the shark was caught, what species it was, or whether it was legally harvested or taken from international waters. Because of this, many consumers do not know the origin of the fins or whether they were legally obtained.

International restrictions

In 2013, 27 countries and the European Union had banned shark finning. International waters are not controlled by any rules. International fishing groups are thinking about banning shark fishing and finning in the Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea. Finning is not allowed in the Eastern Pacific, but shark fishing and finning still happen a lot in most parts of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. In countries like Thailand and Singapore, public awareness ads about finning have reportedly reduced the use of shark fins by 25%.

There are four main types of rules to protect sharks:

• A shark sanctuary is an area where all shark fishing is completely banned. This includes catching sharks for business, accidentally catching them, and selling or trading shark products. Even though these rules are in place, sharks can swim outside the protected area and be caught, fished for fins, or killed. As of March 2018, there were 17 shark sanctuaries worldwide. Examples include:
• Maldives – 353,742 sq. mi. (2010)
• Palau – 233,317 sq. mi. (2009)
• Federated States of Micronesia – 1,155,448 sq. mi. (2015)
• Marshall Islands – 769,205 sq. mi. (2015)
• Samoa – 49,421 sq. mi. (2018)
• New Caledonia – 480,697 sq. mi. (2013)
• Cook Islands – 756,812 sq. mi. (2012)
• French Polynesia – 1,840,642 sq. mi. (2012)
• Honduras – 92,757 sq. mi. (2011)
• The Bahamas – 242,971 sq. mi. (2011)
• Dominican Republic – 104,050 sq. mi. (2017)
• Cayman Islands – 45,998 sq. mi. (2015)
• Bonaire – 3,747 sq. mi. (2015)
• British Virgin Islands – 30,933 sq. mi. (2014)
• St. Maarten – 193 sq. mi. (2016)
• Saba – 3,102 sq. mi. (2015)

• Areas where sharks must be landed with all their fins still attached.
• Areas where rules are based on the size of shark fins compared to the shark’s body.
• Areas where rules control the trade of shark products.

Shark finning was banned in the European Union in 2003 (Regulation (EC) No 1185/2003).

In November 2011, the EU approved a rule requiring all EU-registered fishing boats to land sharks only if they had all their fins still attached. However, the rule was hard to enforce because it allowed fins to be removed on the boat and other parts to be taken to different ports. The EU Parliament supported the idea of banning the separate landing of shark bodies and fins but allowed an amendment that let fins be removed on the boat.

On March 19, 2012, the EU Council agreed to close gaps in the shark finning rules by requiring all sharks to be landed with their fins naturally attached. Spain and Portugal were the only EU countries that objected to this rule.

On June 6, 2013, the EU Council finalized the rule to close all loopholes in the shark finning ban. By enforcing the "fins naturally attached" policy without exceptions, the EU ended the practice of shark finning by its ships.

National and district restrictions

Live shark finning, which involves cutting fins from live sharks and throwing the bodies back into the ocean, is illegal in all areas of Australia. However, Australia still takes part in the shark fin trade. A policy called "Fins Naturally Attached" (FNA) is used in some Australian fisheries to reduce and control live shark finning. Not all states in Australia have adopted this policy. In Queensland and Western Australia, the FNA policy is not in place, which means illegal live finning and dumping of sharks might still happen. Recently, the Northern Territory government changed its shark fishery rules to require the FNA policy, following international and national standards. FNA means sharks must be brought to land with their fins still attached to their bodies. This has been shown to reduce illegal targeting of sharks, prevent the dumping of unwanted sharks at sea, and stop live shark finning.

Shark finning is not allowed in any tuna or billfish longline fishery, or in any Commonwealth fishery that catches sharks. Fins must be landed attached to the shark’s body, and additional rules apply in some states or territories. In New South Wales, sharks or any part of a shark cannot be on a boat at any time (including after landing) unless the fins are naturally attached.

In Australia, the export and import of wildlife and wildlife products is controlled by Part 13A of the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), managed by the Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. These rules apply to individuals, businesses, and not-for-profit organizations. CITES Appendix II shark specimens cannot be legally imported into Australia for personal or commercial use unless:

• The specimen has a valid Australian CITES import permit (which can only be given if an overseas CITES export permit was issued); or
• The specimen has a valid certificate from an overseas CITES authority stating the specimen was obtained before the species was listed on CITES (a pre-CITES certificate); or
• The specimen has an overseas CITES export permit or equivalent, is part of personal luggage, and is for personal use, not for trade or sale.

No permits are needed for importing shark species not listed above. To avoid being seized, all products must be clearly labeled or have documentation showing the species of origin.

Shark finning has been illegal in Canada since 1994. In 2019, Canada passed a law banning the import and export of shark fins, making it the first country to do so nationally.

In late 2011, the city of Brantford, Ontario, became the first Canadian city to pass rules banning the possession, sale, or consumption of shark fin products. No restaurants in Brantford served shark fin, so the ban had little opposition and was mostly symbolic. Soon after, other cities like Toronto, Calgary, Mississauga, and others in Southern Ontario also passed similar rules. The votes were:

• Brantford, Ontario: 11 to 0
• Oakville, Ontario: 7 to 0
• Mississauga, Ontario: 11 to 0 (later repealed in 2013)
• Toronto: 38 to 4 (later overturned by a court in 2012)
• Newmarket, Ontario: 8 to 1
• Calgary: 13 to 2

Markham and Richmond Hill did not support the motion, believing it was a federal issue. Chinese restaurants and businesses selling shark fin opposed the ban and planned to challenge the rules in court. When Toronto imposed high fines, they did so.

In late 2012, the Ontario Superior Court ruled that Toronto’s shark fin ban was invalid because the city did not have the legal power to enforce it. The judge agreed that shark finning was cruel but disagreed with Toronto’s reasoning for the ban. Toronto plans to appeal the court’s decision.

On 1 December 2012, Ontario Superior Court Judge James Spence ruled that Toronto’s ban was not valid. Members of Toronto’s Chinese business community also challenged the ban. Judge Spence said the city could not enforce the ban. In September 2012, Toronto’s mayor, Rob Ford, did not support the ban, believing it was not the city’s responsibility.

On 27 March 2013, a private bill to ban shark fin imports into Canada failed in the House of Commons. Shark finning was already illegal in Canadian waters, but no law existed to stop importing fins. In 2018, Conservative Senator Michael L. MacDonald reintroduced the bill (Bill S-238), which passed in the Senate and will now be debated in the House of Commons.

Calgary’s city council decided to delay a total ban until December 2013 to explore ethical sources of shark products. Alderman John Mar said more time was needed to discuss and find alternatives. The new bylaw aimed to ban the sale, distribution, and trade of shark fins but not possession or consumption. Vancouver’s Councillor Kerry Jang said the issue was not a cultural one, noting that China and its government had phased out shark fins from state banquets. He also pointed out that bans in Calgary and Toronto faced legal challenges because they tried to ban possession and consumption, which is hard to enforce.

On 27 May 2013, against the wishes of the Shark Fin Free Calgary organization, Calgary City Council overturned the ban. The Chinese community in Calgary protested the ban, and the city’s task force recommended against it. According to The Calgary Herald, Mayor Naheed Nenshi never supported a full ban, even though he had voted for it earlier.

In 2